Nationwide concealed carry: MERGED

This is a discussion on Nationwide concealed carry: MERGED within the Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; Packin' heat: Bill aims to honor concealed weapons permits nationwide
Utah's licenses would be good anywhere in U.S.
By Thomas Burr
The Salt Lake Tribune
...

Packin' heat Bill

WASHINGTON - A bill introduced into Congress this week would force every state to recognize a concealed-weapons permit issued in another state, a move that would make Utah's permit even more of a prize nationwide.
Utah has one of the more easily obtainable permits - an applicant need not even set foot in the state - and the permit is recognized in 32 other states. The Secure Access to Firearms Enhancement Act, dubbed the SAFE Act by supporters, would force the other 17 states to honor the Utah permit or another issued by a carrier's home state.
The bill, introduced this week and co-sponsored by Utah GOP Rep. Chris Cannon, includes the caveat that the permit holder would have to abide by the state's laws on where the firearm can't be carried, such as churches or schools.
Cannon backs the bill because he says the Second Amendment guarantees an individual's right to carry and own a weapon and that right doesn't end at the state line.
"You no more give up that right leaving Utah than you give up your right to freely exercise your faith," Cannon says. "This legislation is an important effort to help make that clear - as a matter of federal law."
As of the end of March, Utah has more than 112,000 valid permits registered, according to the Bureau of Criminal Identification. Of those, about 38,300 have been issued to out-of-state residents.

Utah's concealed-weapons permit has been referred to as a national permit because it can be issued to anyone - even foreign nationals - who passes certification and is not barred by law from obtaining a weapon. Other states have more restrictions on issuing such permits.
Steve Gunn, a board member of the Gun Violence Prevention Center of Utah, says the bill would compromise the general concept of a state's ability to pass laws restricting concealed weapons. Several states, such as California and New Jersey, have a different burden for obtaining a concealed-firearm permit.
"The bill would detract from the ability of a particular state to regulate the carrying of concealed weapons," Gunn says. "I don't see why Utah should be able to dictate to California whether a concealed weapon can be carried in that state."
"It just sounds to me like a really bad idea," Gunn added.
The SAFE Act faces a tough legislative road, however. Previous incarnations have made it as far as a House committee hearing, but never advanced to a full vote. And with Congress controlled by Democrats, the bill may not get a hearing this year.
Larry Pratt, the executive director of the Virginia-based Gun Owners of America, the group pushing the SAFE bill, says the legislation should create some uniformity in the hodgepodge of state laws across the nation.
The bill is similar to the constitutional protections for drivers who have a license issued in one state and who are traveling in another, Pratt says.
"You don't have to take a driver's test when you go from Virginia to D.C.," he says. tburr@sltrib.com

The Secure Access to Firearms Enhancement Act of 2008

* What it does: Allows anyone who has a valid concealed-carry permit in one state to operate under that state's carrying laws in another state. Carriers would have to abide by the receiving state's laws on where a firearm can't be carried, such as schools or churches.
* What happens now: The bill has been sent to the House Judiciary Committee. It's unclear if it will get a hearing.

Wouldn't that mean that any state permit would be honored in any of the 50 states? Right now, Oregon's permit is not honored in very many other states. (Which is why I also have a Utah permit.) Would this bill force other states to honor Oregons????

Does that mean that my two favorite states, Illinois and California, would be forced to honor my permit?

Wouldn't that mean that any state permit would be honored in any of the 50 states? Right now, Oregon's permit is not honored in very many other states. (Which is why I also have a Utah permit.) Would this bill force other states to honor Oregons????

Does that mean that my two favorite states, Illinois and California, would be forced to honor my permit?

A nationwide carry law only makes sense. So many different circumstances--lessen the burdens of research, dissemination, and interpretation of the multitude of laws and reciprocity agreements on the citizen and the court systems. One can be assured that a national carry institution won't be a simple ordeal or undertaking. There would be plenty of stipulations to consider along with that as well, but it would probably be more streamlined again than all the different individual state laws and avoid some confusion. Right now I think most of us can see this as only a good thing, but what if-----what if something like this had to go along with say--the national identification system??? Would we still be jumping up and down about it if those wishing to obtain a national carry license HAD to have a national ID first? Would a national carry legislation by the fed essentially strip the individual states of rights to uphold or institute specific legislation pertaining to firearms and carrying? I guess we'll have to read the fine print huh? Nothing the fed does is 'just that simple'.

History says that if the Feds get involved we are going to get screwed and I don't think that this is any exception. I am for the idea but totally against the actual passage of this bill. Once this is passed the next step will be Fed regulations on who gets a permit then Fed issuance of the permit then.......